Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #457958 > unrolled thread

Climatgate

Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written

Contents

  Climatgate The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-23 08:49 -0800
    Re: Climatgate The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-23 21:05 -0800
      Re: Climatgate Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-24 09:29 -0600

#457958 — Climatgate

“I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple,” said noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin


http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/11/22/watch-read-7th-anniversary-of-climategate-the-un-top-scientists-exposed-see-morano-debating-in-2009-2010/




..the fraud never ends does it? 

The first thing that needs to be done is
take out 'Science class' from skools.

It's like taking a class in Witchcraft.


How many planets are there in our solar system? 


https://www.google.com/#q=how+many+planets+are+there+in+our+solar+system

First answer reads 9.

What number You came up with??? 8?

There is only one planet in our solar system....it's fuckin EARTH!


Get it right!


Anything else is Science Fraud.


When does Life begin? When you see a tree.


If a rock the shape of a ball doesn't have any water on it or a tree, it's not a fuckin planet!!!!



How many planets are there in our solar system? If you cannot answer that question correctly...somebody is lying to you, that's why.


Your fuckin stupid Science teacher.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#458070

JanPB wrote:
> 
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 8:50:01 AM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:
> > “I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple,” said noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin
> >
> >
> > http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/11/22/watch-read-7th-anniversary-of-climategate-the-un-top-scientists-exposed-see-morano-debating-in-2009-2010/
> 
> Crackpot web site.
> Jan


Looks like a crackpot against crackpot...


I cannot tell these science crackpots apart...


they all call each other...crackpots.


It's a crackpot war here...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#458086

On 11/23/2016 11:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> JanPB wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 8:50:01 AM UTC-8, The Starmaker
>> wrote:
>>> “I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple,” said
>>> noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/11/22/watch-read-7th-anniversary-of-climategate-the-un-top-scientists-exposed-see-morano-debating-in-2009-2010/
>>


The
>>>
dossier of computer programs in the Climategate documents is far
from complete – programs from Tim Osborn and Ian Harris are in the
dossier, but not programs from either Keith Briffa or Phil Jones.

In the directory osborn-tree6, the program science99_fig1.pro both by
its name and contents appears to be the program that was used to produce
the figure in Briffa and Osborn(Science 1999) – see here for example,
though the program in the Climategate zip file is not dated until Feb
16, 2000, about 9 months after the publication of the article.

But there’s an apparent curious inconsistency between the program in
Osborn’s archive and the figure as published in Science (Update Mar 23
pm – reader PaulM has now traced the implementation of the deletion of
pre-1550 back further).. Here’s the section of code in which the Briffa
reconstruction is retrieved:


2: begin ; Age-banded MXD
alltit=”Age-banded density NH growing-season reconstruction”
; Period to consider
perst=1402
peren=1960
fac=0.0 ; do not smooth it any further!!!
; restore,filename=’../treeharry/densadj_all(330).idlsave’
; timey=x
; ; CONVERSION FACTORS FOR AGE-BANDED MXD, BY REGRESSION ON INSTR.
; ts=densadj*0.156525 ; converts it from density to temperature anom
timey=newagetime
ts=newagets
kl=where((timey ge perst) and (timey le peren),nyr)
timey=timey(kl)
ts=ts(kl)
; ts=ts(kl)-0.140369 ; to convert it oC wrt 1961-90
end

The start period for the reconstruction in the code is 1402 (the start
of the magenta portion), rather than 1550 – the start of the Briffa
version in the actual graphic.

It’s therefore evident that they had, at one time, plotted the Science
1999 spaghetti graph showing data before 1550, but elected to delete the
pre-1550 data as well as the post-1960 data. I presume that there is
another version of this program (with the corresponding line reading
perst=1550) that was used to generate the figure in the Science article.
It’s odd that it isn’t in the Osborn archive.

Update Mar 23 pm: – PaluM observes that the deletion of the pre-1550
portion can be accomplished through the parameter yrmxd, which proves to
come from either the directory bandtempNHsm50_calmultipcr.idlsave or
bandtempNHsm50_calmultipcr_NSIBhug.idlsave.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written

csiph-web